IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/43320.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Truthful Two-Stage Mechanism for Eliciting Probabilistic Estimates with Unknown Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Papakonstantinou, A.
  • Rogers, A.
  • Gerding, E. H.
  • Jennings, N. R

Abstract

This paper reports on the design of a novel two-stage mechanism, based on strictly proper scoring rules, that motivates selfish rational agents to make a costly probabilistic estimate or forecast of a specified precision and report it truthfully to a centre. Our mechanism is applied in a setting where the centre is faced with multiple agents, and has no knowledge about their costs. Thus, in the first stage of the mechanism, the centre uses a reverse second price auction to allocate the estimation task to the agent who reveals the lowest cost. While, in the second stage, the centre issues a payment based on a strictly proper scoring rule. When taken together, the two stages motivate agents to reveal their true costs, and then to truthfully reveal their estimate. We prove that this mechanism is incentive compatible and individually rational, and then present empirical results comparing the performance of the well known quadratic, spherical and logarithmic scoring rules. We show that the quadratic and the logarithmic rules result in the centre making the highest and the lowest expected payment to agents respectively. At the same time, however, the payments of the latter rule are unbounded, and thus the spherical rule proves to be the best candidate in this setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Papakonstantinou, A. & Rogers, A. & Gerding, E. H. & Jennings, N. R, 2008. "A Truthful Two-Stage Mechanism for Eliciting Probabilistic Estimates with Unknown Costs," MPRA Paper 43320, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:43320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/43320/1/MPRA_paper_43320.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James E. Matheson & Robert L. Winkler, 1976. "Scoring Rules for Continuous Probability Distributions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(10), pages 1087-1096, June.
    2. Reinhard Selten, 1998. "Axiomatic Characterization of the Quadratic Scoring Rule," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(1), pages 43-61, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Papakonstantinou, A. & Rogers, A & Gerding, E. H. & Jennings, N. R., 2010. "Mechanism Design for the truthful elicitation of costly probabilistic estimates in Distributed Information Systems," MPRA Paper 43324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Papakonstantinou, A. & Rogers, A. & Gerding, E. H & Jennings, N. R., 2010. "Mechanism Design for eliciting probabilistic estimates from multiple suppliers with unknown costs and limited precision," MPRA Paper 43323, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Victor Jose, 2009. "A Characterization for the Spherical Scoring Rule," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 263-281, March.
    2. de Haan, Thomas, 2020. "Eliciting belief distributions using a random two-level partitioning of the state space," Working Papers in Economics 1/20, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    3. Luisa Bisaglia & Matteo Grigoletto, 2021. "A new time-varying model for forecasting long-memory series," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 30(1), pages 139-155, March.
    4. Tommaso Proietti & Martyna Marczak & Gianluigi Mazzi, 2017. "Euromind‐ D : A Density Estimate of Monthly Gross Domestic Product for the Euro Area," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(3), pages 683-703, April.
    5. Karl Schlag & James Tremewan & Joël Weele, 2015. "A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 457-490, September.
    6. Krüger, Fabian & Pavlova, Lora, 2019. "Quantifying subjective oncertainty in survey expectations," Working Papers 0664, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    7. Papakonstantinou, A. & Rogers, A & Gerding, E. H. & Jennings, N. R., 2010. "Mechanism Design for the truthful elicitation of costly probabilistic estimates in Distributed Information Systems," MPRA Paper 43324, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Karl Schlag & James Tremewan & Joël Weele, 2015. "A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 457-490, September.
    9. Luisa Bisaglia & Matteo Grigoletto, 2018. "A new time-varying model for forecasting long-memory series," Papers 1812.07295, arXiv.org.
    10. Christopher P. Chambers & Nicolas S. Lambert, 2021. "Dynamic Belief Elicitation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 375-414, January.
    11. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    12. Benjamin Enke & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Correlation Neglect in Belief Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 313-332.
    13. Thomas W. Keelin & Bradford W. Powley, 2011. "Quantile-Parameterized Distributions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 206-219, September.
    14. Manuel Gebetsberger & Jakob W. Messner & Georg J. Mayr & Achim Zeileis, 2017. "Estimation methods for non-homogeneous regression models: Minimum continuous ranked probability score vs. maximum likelihood," Working Papers 2017-23, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    15. Ricardo Crisóstomo, 2021. "Estimating real‐world probabilities: A forward‐looking behavioral framework," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(11), pages 1797-1823, November.
    16. Jenny Brynjarsdottir & Jonathan Hobbs & Amy Braverman & Lukas Mandrake, 2018. "Optimal Estimation Versus MCMC for $$\mathrm{{CO}}_{2}$$ CO 2 Retrievals," Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics, Springer;The International Biometric Society;American Statistical Association, vol. 23(2), pages 297-316, June.
    17. Magnus Reif, 2020. "Macroeconomics, Nonlinearities, and the Business Cycle," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 87.
    18. Marco LiCalzi & Roland Mühlenbernd, 2022. "Feature-weighted categorized play across symmetric games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1052-1078, June.
    19. Catania, Leopoldo & Proietti, Tommaso, 2020. "Forecasting volatility with time-varying leverage and volatility of volatility effects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1301-1317.
    20. Mikuláš Gangur & Miroslav Plevný, 2014. "Tools for Consumer Rights Protection in the Prediction of Electronic Virtual Market and Technological Changes," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 16(36), pages 578-578, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    mechanism design; computer science; artificial intelligence; multi-agent systems; scoring rules;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:43320. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.